Grunewald v. United States Halperin v. United States Bolich v. United States, No. 183

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Citation1 L.Ed.2d 74,352 U.S. 866,77 S.Ct. 91
Docket NumberNo. 186,No. 184,No. 183
PartiesHenry W. GRUNEWALD, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES of America. Max HALPERIN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES of America. Daniel A. BOLICH, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES of America
Decision Date15 October 1956

352 U.S. 866
77 S.Ct. 91
1 L.Ed.2d 74
Henry W. GRUNEWALD, petitioner,

v.

UNITED STATES of America.

No. 183.
Max HALPERIN, petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES of America.
No. 184.
Daniel A. BOLICH, petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES of America.
No. 186.

Supreme Court of the United States

October 15, 1956

Page 866

The petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit are granted limiting the questions to those enumerated below:

(a) No. 183:

'1. Whether a conviction of a conspiracy to procure from the Fraud Bureau of the Internal Revenue Department a decision not to prosecute a tax fraud, where the object of the conspiracy had been accomplished by January, 1949, and prosecution was barred under the statute of limitations by January, 1952, may be sustained, on the theory that the conspiracy must have included a continuing agreement to conceal—the indictment having been found October 25, 1954, and the proof being that one or more of the conspirators in March, 1952, attempted to cover their tracks from investigators.

'2. Whether independent acts of alleged conspirators, after the accomplishment of the object of the conspiracy and done without the knowledge or the participation of the petitioner Grunewald, may suffice to support a charge against him that the original conspiracy included a continuing purpose to conceal so that the conspiracy might be deemed to extend down to the last act of concealment.

'3. Whether an alleged continuing conspiracy to conceal could be found as to the petitioner Grunewald, when he was concerned only with the original object of the conspiracy and was acquitted by the Trial Court on three counts of attempting to influence witnesses, which the Court charged the jury could be acts of continuing concealment.

'4. Whether a purpose to continue to conceal the accomplishment of the primary conspiracy may be inferred from the fact that the conspirators would be pre-

Page 867

sumed to know that their activities would always be open to investigation—whether a subordinate conspiracy to conceal may be implied from the original crime.

'5. Whether the Trial Court committed error in permitting the jury to find a continuing conspiracy to conceal from the fact that, more than three years after and object of the conspiracy had been accomplished, the petitioner Grunewald, when his secretary was subpoenaed before a grand jury, told her she need not answer various questions and could say she forgot.

'6. Whether the Trial Court committed error in permitting the defendant Halperin, the only witness for the defense, to be cross-examined, for the purpose of impeaching his credibility, on the fact that he had been, prior to the trial, subpoenaed before a grand jury and had there claimed his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination on a long line of questions. The constitutional privilege thus infringed is that part of the Fifth Amendment which reads '* * * nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself * *...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • Liddy, In re, No. 73-1562
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • 10 Octubre 1974
    ...113 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 350 U.S. 897, 76 S.Ct. 156, 100 L.Ed. 788 (1955). See also Grunewald v. United States, 353 U.S. 391, 423, 77 S.Ct. 91, 1 L.Ed.2d 74 (1957); Meshbesher, supra note 30, 41 F.R.D. at 202; Comment, The Grand Jury Witness' Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, 62 Nw.......
  • Smith v. Sperling, No. 316
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • 10 Junio 1957
    ...117 F.Supp. 781. The Court of Appeals affirmed. 9 Cir., 237 F.2d 317. The case is here on a writ of certiorari. 352 U.S. 865, 77 S.Ct. 98, 1 L.Ed.2d 74. This is a corporate cause of action brought by a stockholder. Whether it is a proper case for assertion by a stockholder of that cause of ......
  • United States v. Hoffa
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • 6 Noviembre 1957
    ...case, as well as in such other cases as Giglio, United States v. Giglio, 2 Cir., 1956, 232 F.2d 589, certiorari granted 352 U.S. 865, 77 S.Ct. 91, 1 L.Ed.2d 74 and Lawn, United States v. Lawn, D.C.S.D.N.Y.1953, 115 F.Supp. 674, Government's appeal dismissed as not timely filed, United State......
  • Grunewald v. United States Halperin v. United States Bolich v. United States, Nos. 183
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • 27 Mayo 1957
    ...The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed, with the late Judge Frank dissenting. 233 F.2d 556. We granted certiorari, 352 U.S. 866, 77 S.Ct. 91, 1 L.Ed.2d 74, in order to resolve important questions relating to (a) the statute of limitations in conspiracy Page 394 prosecutions, a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • Liddy, In re, No. 73-1562
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • 10 Octubre 1974
    ...113 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 350 U.S. 897, 76 S.Ct. 156, 100 L.Ed. 788 (1955). See also Grunewald v. United States, 353 U.S. 391, 423, 77 S.Ct. 91, 1 L.Ed.2d 74 (1957); Meshbesher, supra note 30, 41 F.R.D. at 202; Comment, The Grand Jury Witness' Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, 62 Nw.......
  • Smith v. Sperling, No. 316
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • 10 Junio 1957
    ...117 F.Supp. 781. The Court of Appeals affirmed. 9 Cir., 237 F.2d 317. The case is here on a writ of certiorari. 352 U.S. 865, 77 S.Ct. 98, 1 L.Ed.2d 74. This is a corporate cause of action brought by a stockholder. Whether it is a proper case for assertion by a stockholder of that cause of ......
  • United States v. Hoffa
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • 6 Noviembre 1957
    ...case, as well as in such other cases as Giglio, United States v. Giglio, 2 Cir., 1956, 232 F.2d 589, certiorari granted 352 U.S. 865, 77 S.Ct. 91, 1 L.Ed.2d 74 and Lawn, United States v. Lawn, D.C.S.D.N.Y.1953, 115 F.Supp. 674, Government's appeal dismissed as not timely filed, United State......
  • Grunewald v. United States Halperin v. United States Bolich v. United States, Nos. 183
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • 27 Mayo 1957
    ...The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed, with the late Judge Frank dissenting. 233 F.2d 556. We granted certiorari, 352 U.S. 866, 77 S.Ct. 91, 1 L.Ed.2d 74, in order to resolve important questions relating to (a) the statute of limitations in conspiracy Page 394 prosecutions, a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT